My opposition to the HST in BC is based on two simple reasons.

1. The BC Liberals flat-out lied about their plans not to introduce it. (see below) When Ontario did it, they did it the right way: the plan was introduced to the public before the election, and people voted with informed opinions.

2. The BC Liberals have not operated the province with any fiscal restraint. (Seriously, $600 million for a new roof for BC Place, and it can't even close up while it's raining?) Instead, they've had to rely on at least two major one-time sell-the-farm gambits (the BC Rail sale and the HST coming with a crucial $1.6 billion one-time gift from the feds) to make ends meet.

The BC Liberals in 2009, right before the election:

"The harmonized GST would make it harder for future provincial governments to lower or raise sales tax rates, which reduces flexibility. In short, a harmonized GST is not something that is contemplated in the B.C. Liberal platform."

Just to be sure, the restaurant association asked whether it would be consulted if the Liberals changed their minds. "We do commit to engage in consultation with industry prior to any potential future tax changes that affect food," was the reply.

A few months later, when the election was over, they turned around and implemented it so quickly it was clear they'd been planning it before the election. As further documents revealed.

Come to think of it, the lies about the sale of BC Rail - from the state of its finances to whether it even was a sale or "merely" a 990-year lease, remind me a lot about the similarly dishonest post-facto fearmongering about turning over the HST.

Put it this way: I don't care whether the HST is better or worse for the province than the GST/PST. The important things to me are that a democracy cannot be run by lying to the electorate, and that the BC Liberals must stop selling the future to pay for today.

OK, so, let me start this off by saying I've been reasonably persuaded that the HST is a good thing for BC in the long run. And I think Bill Vander Zalm is an ass, and Bill Tieleman I'm pretty mixed on.

But that said, the way the HST was implemented is absolutely inimical to democracy and should be defeated for that reason alone.

It is unacceptable for a party to deceive the province into "what's best". Make your case to the people and then govern with an actual mandate. Don't say you're not going to bring in an HST and then do it.

This takes some chutzpah:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper claims he wants to build bridges with his political opponents in Parliament.

"Obviously we have to do some trust building on both sides," Harper said at an impromptu news conference after the Governor General approved his request to prorogue Parliament until January 26.

"Trust-building"??? This from the man who broke his own law that elections would come at a fixed date? Who, having won his early election -- the sort he used to rail against -- then proceeded to call for an end to partisanship right before trying to kneecap his enemies by cutting off their funding?

Just how stupid does he think Canada is?

Is it just me, or is the current freak-out about the coalition taking power from Harper's minority government like 15x worse than when Stronach or Emerson crossed the aisle?

James Bow:

It shows a remarkable cynicism on Ms. Cadman's part, and is possibly why she is comfortable today in running for the Conservative Party: because she doesn't feel that the Conservative actions were particularly unusual in politics. Except that the Conservatives promised that they would be different.

Now, I never thought the Tories were or would be different, or at least not different in the "less corrupt" direction.